-
Feature Request
-
Resolution: Done
-
Major
-
None
-
None
- links to
[WFLY-19130] [Community] Publish Wildfly channel and manifest during project build
Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - darran.lofthouse@redhat.com I believe so. The proposal is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly-proposals/pull/561
Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - darran.lofthouse@redhat.com I believe so. The proposal is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly-proposals/pull/561 
Darran Lofthouse
added a comment - This issue is reported as a Feature Request, is this being proposed for inclusion in WildFly under the WildFly Feature Development Process?
Darran Lofthouse
added a comment - This issue is reported as a Feature Request, is this being proposed for inclusion in WildFly under the WildFly Feature Development Process? Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - OK in this case it sounds like separate channels might be the way to go. I'll add this info to the AD
Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - OK in this case it sounds like separate channels might be the way to go. I'll add this info to the AD 
Brian Stansberry
added a comment - Thanks. WildFly Preview is distinct from the other two. It can, and often will, use different versions of the same artifact vs the other two.
In theory it's possible for wildfly FP to want different versions of the same GAV vs wildfly-ee.
Brian Stansberry
added a comment - Thanks. WildFly Preview is distinct from the other two. It can, and often will, use different versions of the same artifact vs the other two.
In theory it's possible for wildfly FP to want different versions of the same GAV vs wildfly-ee. Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - bstansbe@redhat.com ideally I think it would make sense to merge those 3 manifests into one rather then publishing all three.
I'm going to create the analysis doc this week.
Bartosz Spyrko-Smietanko
added a comment - bstansbe@redhat.com ideally I think it would make sense to merge those 3 manifests into one rather then publishing all three.
I'm going to create the analysis doc this week. Brian Stansberry
added a comment - spyrkob Technically, is this just a matter of removing this:
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/ee-feature-pack/channel/pom.xml#L42-L49 [1]
and uncommenting this:
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/ee-feature-pack/channel/pom.xml#L42-L49
and doing the same in https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/galleon-pack/channel/pom.xml and https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/preview/channel/pom.xml
?
Beyond the technical there might be discussion of the name of things, although I think what's there is suitable. Then we need an analysis document. The main thing in the analysis is to describe what the intended channel is (e.g. single stream).
[1] I actually think we should leave the maven-deploy-plugin bit there, but with 'skip' set to false.
Brian Stansberry
added a comment - spyrkob Technically, is this just a matter of removing this:
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/ee-feature-pack/channel/pom.xml#L42-L49 [1]
and uncommenting this:
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/ee-feature-pack/channel/pom.xml#L42-L49
and doing the same in https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/galleon-pack/channel/pom.xml and https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/main/preview/channel/pom.xml
?
Beyond the technical there might be discussion of the name of things, although I think what's there is suitable. Then we need an analysis document. The main thing in the analysis is to describe what the intended channel is (e.g. single stream).
[1] I actually think we should leave the maven-deploy-plugin bit there, but with 'skip' set to false. 
bstansbe@redhat.com I think it would be good for the channels to have a separate groupId space (similar to boms). I implemented the draft PR this way, but I can change this if you think it's better to simply publish them in the org.wildfly groupId.